Yes, there are extremists in Ukraine. Azov (and others) was this before the war, they where also a political party that did not get enough votes for a single seat in Ukrainian parlement.
And Azov started to militarize… after the Russian invasion in 2014 as counter weight to Girkin and his extremists who dragged Ukraine into a war.
So what is your point? A whole state is defined by its extremist minority? Ukraine does not have the luxury to crack down on or exclude these groups now they are in an existential battle for survival.
A state is comprised of more than just the people that got elected into office. When you have Azov formally integrated into the military, a president that was elected on the platform of uniting the country and ending a civil war getting laughed at when he tries to enact his mandate, diplomats and other officials that uphold bandera, a state forbidding minority languages, etc. It’s not just “an extremist minority” but an insitutional problem.
And to support these forces in order to topple a perceived geopolitical enemy is just collaborating with fascist, especially when doing so created that enemy in the first place.
I think you are turning around cause and effect. Fringe political extremist where turned into "heroic defenders of Ukraine the day little green men showed up to separate Crimea and the Donbas from Ukraine. If anything the Russian invasion have them legitimacy. It clearly says so in the links you provided.
Edit: And Putin stated Ukraine was not a country as early as the 90’s even though the USSR fell apart and countries that where autonomous before, became independent again.
Fringe political extremist where turned into "heroic defenders of Ukraine the day little green men showed up to separate Crimea and the Donbas from Ukraine.
Turned by whom? When you have leaked phone calls where the US discussed regime change, or Biden already predicting in 97 a pissed off Russia when NATO expands even when Clinton and Yeltsin basically handpicked Putin, it’s actually you that has cause and effect reversed.
My sources are western and are corroborating far right/Nazi Elements in Ukraine, but it’s still slanted with western foreign policy so you should read it with a grain of salt…
Turned in the perception of Ukranians. The Azov movement was seen by many Ukranians for what they where… right wing extremists they had no legitimacy. But when Russia invaded they fought the Russians tooth and nail, legitimizing them.
Biden articulated what Putin was saying himself. Joining NATO is the choice of a souverein nation and using that as an excuse for invasion is just that… an excuse.
So no, I don’t think I see it reversed. And what we are seeing unfold is clear. You claim to be anti imperialist but when Russia does it it’s OK?
The war is horrible and can end with Russia withdrawing to within their own borders, but that won’t happen as Putin will be punished by his “own” and replaced with someone else to do it.
After the dissolution of the SU, you had a friendly Russia and an expectations that NATO is going to disband especially since the Warsaw pact was a reaction to it. Why have NATO still? Who was the enemy? (No it’s not a Defensive force and never was). The disbanding never happened. Even Putins Russia tried to join it 3-4 times. When you see former Warsaw pact members change regime and join NATO shortly afterwards you know what’s up and what’s coming for you. Invading Ukraine was preemptive and a reaction to NATO expansion. It’s the causus belli. So yes you have it reversed. Even war hawks like Mearshheimer ane Kissinger are/were saying this
Statements without proof can be dismissed without proof.
Both Zelensky and Azov are funded by Ukrainian billionaire Ihor Kolomoisky, but do go on there little buddy https://www.thedailybeast.com/billionaire-ukrainian-oligarch-ihor-kolomoisky-under-investigation-by-fbi
Ukraine underplays role of far right in conflict https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30414955
Ukraine: On patrol with the far-right National Militia https://www.bbc.com/news/av/43632454
Commentary: Ukraine’s neo-Nazi problem https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN1GV2TC/
Azov fighters are Ukraine’s greatest weapon and may be its greatest threa https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/10/azov-far-right-fighters-ukraine-neo-nazis
Yes, there are extremists in Ukraine. Azov (and others) was this before the war, they where also a political party that did not get enough votes for a single seat in Ukrainian parlement.
And Azov started to militarize… after the Russian invasion in 2014 as counter weight to Girkin and his extremists who dragged Ukraine into a war.
So what is your point? A whole state is defined by its extremist minority? Ukraine does not have the luxury to crack down on or exclude these groups now they are in an existential battle for survival.
A state is comprised of more than just the people that got elected into office. When you have Azov formally integrated into the military, a president that was elected on the platform of uniting the country and ending a civil war getting laughed at when he tries to enact his mandate, diplomats and other officials that uphold bandera, a state forbidding minority languages, etc. It’s not just “an extremist minority” but an insitutional problem.
And to support these forces in order to topple a perceived geopolitical enemy is just collaborating with fascist, especially when doing so created that enemy in the first place.
I think you are turning around cause and effect. Fringe political extremist where turned into "heroic defenders of Ukraine the day little green men showed up to separate Crimea and the Donbas from Ukraine. If anything the Russian invasion have them legitimacy. It clearly says so in the links you provided.
Edit: And Putin stated Ukraine was not a country as early as the 90’s even though the USSR fell apart and countries that where autonomous before, became independent again.
Turned by whom? When you have leaked phone calls where the US discussed regime change, or Biden already predicting in 97 a pissed off Russia when NATO expands even when Clinton and Yeltsin basically handpicked Putin, it’s actually you that has cause and effect reversed.
My sources are western and are corroborating far right/Nazi Elements in Ukraine, but it’s still slanted with western foreign policy so you should read it with a grain of salt…
Turned in the perception of Ukranians. The Azov movement was seen by many Ukranians for what they where… right wing extremists they had no legitimacy. But when Russia invaded they fought the Russians tooth and nail, legitimizing them.
Biden articulated what Putin was saying himself. Joining NATO is the choice of a souverein nation and using that as an excuse for invasion is just that… an excuse.
So no, I don’t think I see it reversed. And what we are seeing unfold is clear. You claim to be anti imperialist but when Russia does it it’s OK?
The war is horrible and can end with Russia withdrawing to within their own borders, but that won’t happen as Putin will be punished by his “own” and replaced with someone else to do it.
After the dissolution of the SU, you had a friendly Russia and an expectations that NATO is going to disband especially since the Warsaw pact was a reaction to it. Why have NATO still? Who was the enemy? (No it’s not a Defensive force and never was). The disbanding never happened. Even Putins Russia tried to join it 3-4 times. When you see former Warsaw pact members change regime and join NATO shortly afterwards you know what’s up and what’s coming for you. Invading Ukraine was preemptive and a reaction to NATO expansion. It’s the causus belli. So yes you have it reversed. Even war hawks like Mearshheimer ane Kissinger are/were saying this
Sure, if that’s your take there is no use further discussing it.